HMS Vanguard by RMC - FINISHED - Amati/Victory Models - scale 1:72

[RMC]

I have just PM'd Jose to the effect that it is using the 'wrong' spelling of the website which shows up as a  problem. The website with the 'correct' spelling is excellent.

Edited October 30, 2016 by RMC

[Jdieck]

Hi Arthur.

For bad or good, I installed the rings to the sails at the time I made them to make it easier and more accurate to hang them on the frame for fan forming. Now I need to thread the stay on the sail at the time of installation.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Jdieck

[RMC]

The tasks on Plan 8 iare now complete.

 

The hoists for the ship's boat are attached to the mainstay. I am not all that happy with them as the ties of the boats are a little close together. When the hooks are attached to the boats the drops will be a little out of vertical. If I made the hoists closer together, I think that would look a little odd too. I'll think about it. .. As well, it is not clear to me where the belaying points are for the hoists.  It appears that the belaying points for Plan 8 are missing entirely.

 

 

I have put on the second set of shrouds for the bowsprit. These are not on the plans.  They are not finally made off yet, but have turned out quite well. Unfortunately I have a sneaking suspicion that this will come back to bit me later when the spritsail yards need to use the same eyelet.  There may not be room.

 

 

 

Moving to plan 9 - it suggests, among other things, next installing the backstays. However, Keith Julier in one of his books suggests leaving the backstays as long as possible - to provide readier access for doing other rigging.

 

Is this a good idea? I would be grateful for reaction from others' experiences.

Edited November 1, 2016 by RMC

[glbarlow]

I've always done my rigging first standing then running and both of those center outwards driven more by the belay point than the line itself. It gets really tight at the end no matter what, I learned to belay lines with tools. My favorite is a 3mm dowel with a large eye needle glued into the end and the end of the eye cut off making a two pronged pitchfork. With that I can guide the lines onto the belay point.

[RMC]

Thanks Glen. The 'pitchfork idea' is really good.

 

I'm now having second thoughts on the royal stays. The six blocks on the end of the jib already look rather crowded. Adding another for the royal forestay may be overdoing it. Does anyone have any views?

[Jdieck]

Hi Bob:

Here some ideas.

 

For the foremast royal stay block you could:

1) Tie the additoional block a couple of mm ahead of the ones installed

2) Rotate the bottom one to be used for the top spirityard tie 180 degrees and use it for the stay and add a new bottom one with a short 5 mm lead to be used for the top spirityard. See pic below.

 

For the belaying points for the boats hoists I am planning to use the bellfry railing and the railing in front of the main mast marked as Alt 6 and Alt 7 on the pic below.

 

Enjoy!

Jose

Edited November 2, 2016 by Jdieck

[RMC]

Thanks Jose.  I think I will tie the extra block ahead of the others and see how it looks.

 

For the belaying points, where did you find 6 and 7? I can't find them on my plans (though I am notorious in our family in not being able to find anything.).

 

In looking at the photo of the Vanguard from Historic ships (this came from the Amati website I think) I think you are right about the Alt belaying points of the boats.

[Jdieck]

They are not on the plans, As you did I found them from the picture.

[RMC]

Help needed for  backstay questions. I have now come to plan 9 stage 3  which shows the various backstays.  It is not clear to me:

 

* the order in which the 'normal' stays and the shifting stays are mounted over the cross trees (the plans seem to show the shifting stays go on first);

 

* whether the backstays are mounted in pairs in the same way as the shrouds;

 

* whether the backstays are served; and

 

* whether the backstays are made off over the cross trees so that they go between the last and second-last cross trees or behind the last one (ie, in the photo below, do they go over the shrouds etc. through the cross trees or behind the last cross tree?)

 

 

The royal stays are now attached with some misgivings.  They have come out quite well, so I will probably keep them.

 

 

The main royal is made off (temporarily)to the collar of the fore preventer stay.  It can just be seen in the photo.  I have used two small copper eyes and lashing to enable later adjustment to the tension on the stay.  I won't finally make off any of the stays until they are all on.

 

 

The fore royal stay is made off in the same way as the top gallant stay though to the port side rather than the starboard as was the top gallant stay.

 

Edited November 9, 2016 by RMC

[AON]

I may have something but it will take awhile to dig out as I am nowhere near this point in my build but have been collecting info for two years.

If someone beats me to it you can bet I'll add their info to my "library".

Edited November 9, 2016 by AON

[RMC]

Thanks Alan. If I find out anything in the meantime I'll get back to you.

 

Something odd seems to be happening to the editor.  There are two copies of the same photo for some reason and I can't get rid of them.

[RMC]

Alan: I think the correct solution to the 'normal' backstay problem is Shown in B.E.'s (Blue Ensign) beautiful Pegasus model. If you search 'backstays', there are very clear photos of how he has done it.

 

At my stage of the build it will be difficult to do. It would be far easier to put them on before the topgallant masts go on. As well, with the shrouds and forestays there is not much room on the masts of my model to fit any more stuff.

 

Here are a couple of photos of BE's photos to give you the idea.

 

 

 

Of the backstays, it appears that the 'normal' backstays are fitted first and then the shifting backstays are the very last - at the top of the heap. However just how the shifting backstays are fitted around the mast is not clear to me. Complicating this, apparently the normal backstays should go under the forestays. It's a bit late for me now I guess.

 

If any of this is wrong with any or all of this, would anyone please let me know.

Edited November 10, 2016 by RMC

[AON]

That certainly looks like a solution.

I haven't had any luck finding it as yet amoungst my mess of data.... but I have learnt I need to organize it all better.

[RMC]

Thanks once again Arthur for all your help. Given the stage I am at, the only way I can see to fit the backstays is an ersatz B.E. solution.The photos below show how I dealt with it - at least on the mizzen. I think it will work as well for the main and fore, though there is some rigging there that may make life difficult.

 

I have served the stays and then, with a bit of scrap thread, made made a couple of loops. The thread between the two loops is served after a fashion. The photo accentuates its flaws, but it actually doesn't look too bad. I hope I can do a better job on the remaining ones.

 

 

One loop is threaded onto the stay and over the serving.

 

 

The stay is then taken around the mast and then threaded through the second loop.

 

 

Here is how it looks.

 

 

I just noticed the mast and the cap need touching up.

 

 

At the moment I have no idea how the fit the shifting backstays.  I presume they are fitted as a pair in much the same way as the normal stays. If that is the case I guess I will use a variation of the method above.

Edited November 11, 2016 by RMC

[AON]

did you say you had Rigging Period Model Ships by Lennarth Petersson, Chatham Publishing, London, 2000,  ISBN 1 86176 061 2  ?

[RMC]

Allan: that's the one.

 

Arthur: yes, you're right.  I probably wouldn't have noticed the wretched things going around the topgallant until it was too late.

[AON]

I can find nothing of the detail your asking for.

I have copies of standing rigging from here:  http://www.modelexpo-online.com/images/docs/MS2260/MS2260-Syren-Instructions-Chapter-18.pdf

but it is American (US Brig Syren 1803)  and somethings don't agree with other books I have.

You might like to review it just the same though.

 

Sorry I was of no help... and late to boot.

[RMC]

Well you've avoided the naughty corner ..... this time.  But it was close.

[RMC]

I have redone the loops and this time have not placed them around the top gallant. I tried threading the backstay inside the loop of the stay. I addition to being a slightly hair-raising process, it had some unintended consequences: it altered the tension on most of the  forward stays. Rather than redo them all, I decided to simply put the backstays on top. It doesn't really show and only Arthur and I will know, and I at least won't tell. The two back stays on this mast can be fitted between the aft two ribs of the cross trees, but not with the rigging in place on the fore and main. I'll go with consistency.

 

 

 

The next photo shows up every tiny fault. I should stop taking close-ups. In fact the whole thing looks quite good on the model, though I will clean it up a bit - and I still haven't touched up the cap and mast. Neither of the backstays here are tied off yet.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2016 by RMC

[RMC]

With hindsight I would have mounted  the various stays in quite a different order. In putting the backstays on after the forward stays - aside from being incorrect - it made the job needlessly difficult.

 

Here are the mizzen crosstrees. Putting the backstays on here was straightforward though the whole thing looks rather crowded.

 

 

 

 

None of the backstays will be finally made off until as late as possible. This to provide better access should it later be needed.

 

 

This is where things get interesting: the main crosstrees, below. The stays must be mounted in a way that does not foul the line which leads to the main top through the block shown in the photo. This is really not for the faint-hearted and clumsy of whom I am one.

 

The other difficulty is the positioning of the sheaves.  For those who are yet to get to this stage - put the sheaves up 2 to 3 mm higher than shown in the plan. I will just be able to run a line through the bottom sheave with a little fudging, but it's not really satisfactory. The backstays for the fore mast will provide the same problems.

 

 

Another issue is the position of shifting stays. As Arthur has pointed out, the plans are inconsistent, and fortunately I have been able to take advantage again of his experience. Here, I have simply run a piece of thread through the block on the end of the stay to see how it looks. Surprisingly, it seems to avoid fouling the other rigging, though whether that remains true when properly rigged remains to be seen. The whole thing does seem to be a rather odd bit of rigging.

 

 

 

and here is progress

Edited November 22, 2016 by RMC

[RMC]

You mean I was right all the time? I knew it!  I've been trying to convince someone in my household of that for almost 50 years. Strangely she remains unconvinced.

[AON]

I can attest to the fact that even after 41 years...

 

even when I'm right I am wrong.

what is her's is her's and what is mine is her's.

only one opinion really matters.

she's a damned good cook.

she can balance the books.

she knows how to save a buck.

I'd be lost without her.

She doesn't know how to build a model ship (and she's convinced I'm faking it)

[RMC]

Allan: You would think after a combined 90-odd years of experience we would have learned something.  Just goes to show ......

[Jdieck]

OK Bob, I promise i also won't tell anyone that YOU PUT THE BACKSTAYS ON AFTER THE FORWARD STAYS.

 

(Looks just fine to me and I think the shifting backstays would be on top anyway.)

Well, that is the order called by the sequence on the rigging plan althogh not many may notice.

[RMC]

I'm certainly not one of the 'not many'. I'll have to go and actually look (where?), though my record for following instructions is not all that good. It will have to wait until tomorrow though. Having helped my son lay a rather large bunch of concrete pavers today, ship-building can wait.

[RMC]

The back stays for the fore mast are now finished, though not finally made off.

 

 

 

The following photo highlights the problem with the sheaves. The shifting back stay is yet to come (though it is thinner thread than the others). Keeping all the rigging below the sheaves with the spacing shown on the plans is a real problem, though my serving all of the stays probably caused it.   At least I'm fairly confident that I can squash all the rigging down a little to able passing a line through the bottom sheave if necessary.

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by RMC

[Jdieck]

I'm certainly not one of the 'not many'. I'll have to go and actually look (where?), though my record for following instructions is not all that good. It will have to wait until tomorrow though. Having helped my son lay a rather large bunch of concrete pavers today, ship-building can wait.

The sequence on the drawings is the one you seem to have followed but the sequence on the instructin book is different were the backstays are installed first which is also the sequence proposed by Petterson. In any case difficult to notice.

[RMC]

Jose: Thank you for taking the trouble. I have to admit that my instruction book is right at the bottom of the pile. It never occurred to me to look. I will obviously have to lift my game in future - as a first step I'll try to find the instructions.  

[RMC]

The shifting stays on the starboard side are now complete though again, not finally made off.

 

Here are the ties for the main shifting stay.  This had caused all sorts of confusion as the position shown in the plan is incorrect. Fortunately, Arthur (aew) solved the problem, saving me, and others, time and temper.

 

 

and how it looks from the port side. Somehow I seem to have lost the view from the starboard.

 

 

The fore shifting stay caused me quite a bit of trouble. I initially made the mistake of using the spacing between the two blocks suggested by the plan. It infers that the distance between the two blocks on the right side of the picture below are quite close together. This does not work well at all. After lots of trial and even more error, the spacing shown seems to be as good as can be expected.  Even so, some of the lashing (?) between the blocks just fouls the ratlines. I then looked at the large photo on the kit's box and there the fouling was far worse, which of course made me feel far better - as such things so often do.

 

 

Suggestion: do not permanently fit the hook on the left side shown below. Make allowance for adjusting the length of the thread tied to it.  Only fix it once you have the best spacing  to avoid as best you can, fouling the remaining rigging on the ratlines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by RMC

[RMC]

I have come across what I assume to be a minor omission on Plan 1.

 

An eyelet and hook for the fore yard tackle is shown on plan 9.

 

There is no such eyelet shown shown on the channel in Plan 1. I have looked very closely at the large photo on the kit box and I cannot see this bit of rigging at all. I suppose I will have to drill holes in the channels to provide for the extra eyelets, but I wonder if anyone else has come across this.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2016 by RMC